CPS worker from hell

Wow! Bios should be treated like offenders so that less kids are reunited with their parents?

Well, bios are offenders. These kids didn't neglect, abuse, and traumatize themselves. It doesn't mean that they can't get help and get it together but they ARE offenders.

Wonder how he taped her with his cell phone. Wouldn't she see it recording. Looks like he would have had it in his shirt pocket with the lens in view. Anyway this CPS worker stated a lot of her ''opinions'' and nothing ''on the books''. For example; ''You shouldn't question your daughter about school and her home life, it's none of your buisness'' ''You don't need to know what meds your daughter's taking-it's none of your business'' There was a lot more but those are the statements that stand out to me. Whether this guy is a ish stirrer or not, he still has rights as a father to inquire about his daughters well being and her social life. I read at the bottom where it said that the courts ruled in his favor, that he was not in the wrong. Sure this may have been edited to make her look bad, but edit or no edit the tape clearly shows she doesn't know how to keep professionalism at the center.

I think the bottom line is of there is a report filed CPS has to look into it. Sadly way too many resources are wasted on these types of complaints. As far as what I saw no one in that room was appropriate or accurate in their choices or recommendations. For Pete sake - give her juice and make chicken nuggets at home because that's a healthier choice. And pop zero is healthy just because it's not fattening??

Yes. BPs have to commit an offense to some degree in order to get their children removed from their custody. So, they are in fact "offenders". I don't think Temp was implying that ALL BPs are severe offenders or RUs shouldn't happen when they are appropriate. But regardless of the level of the BPs "offense", ALL BPs seem to be treated with the same coddling demeanor by CWs. I can't tell you just how disgusted I was to learn that BPs are identified as the CWs "clients". To me, that's a term used for a consumer who enters into a mutually desirable agreement like with an atty, contractor, medical professional, HOA, etc. The two CWs in the video are obviously power hungry super bi+ches. The biodad in that case knew this, had past experience with these CWs and knew how to manipulate the "scene" on video to his favor..kudos to him I guess. Regardless, after 1 minute into the video its obvious that biodad is struggling with his own mental issues.

It is interesting how you extrapolate out portions of my post so as to make it seem more ominous. I am sorry, I missed part of your intro, how many foster children have been placed with you? If strangers did to our foster children what their birth parents have done, in the vast majority of the cases, they would be charged with anything from a misdemeanor to felony or worse offenses. How is treating these bio parents as "clients" doing them any service? They are "clients" in the alternative intervention model. Once they have "offended" and the children have been removed from a home, which in my county requires a huge amount of evidence, then they should no longer be treated as clients. The point of my post, which your quote eliminated, is that the pendulum has gone too far in the other direction. And yes, there are many children being RUd in my state to unsafe homes where they will be abused again, and/or killed. There is a reason why "non-offending parent" language is used commonly in CPS cases. Thus, the primary parent is seen as "offending" even if they are treated as "clients." BE is lucky to be alive. His bio mom put him at harm's range more times than CPS knows about. We are all lucky that she was stopped when she was before she could have killed him or someone else. Sorry, defend her all you want, in the criminal world, she is an offender.

None of us know anything about this case, the cps history of this family or the child herself. All I see is a unlawfully taped conversion. Are they kind of tough on the guy? Yes. Do we know why? No.

Yeah, it occurred to me after I posted that for all we know this was the 5th "interrogation" they have had with the guy on the matter and were just exasperated with him. I have a lot of patience but even I would have issues in a case like that. (I didn't finish watching the video so am making some of this assessment based on what the other PP said.) I do wonder how he taped without them knowing though and is that even legal?

Temp, I would assume its not legal...not without knowledge of all parties involved.

It is impossible for any of us to know exactly what went on to get to that point where the worker was intensely questioning the b-dad. It sounds like a bitter custody battle with both dad and mom accusing each other of nonsense- and sadly the child is caught in the middle. While I agree that this woman had a severe tone, we don't really know what she was dealing with. And there are forms of mental abuse that are nearly as terrible as physical- if dad and mom are filling this child's head with crazy things, and CPS is involved- I can see why she would question him for telling the daughter that she is having side affects. Taken by itself it seems out of line- but with the cuts- I don't know. Very one sided. Keelah- I think you took Temp mom's statement wrong and are trying to make it sound like a different point was being made. She is simply saying that bios that do abuse (and most of the kids are taken into CPS custody for some kind of abuse or neglect) should be treated like criminals to the extent their crime warrants and not treated like clients who are being catered to until they learn to parent. And I agree. When children are no longer treated like property by the law- owned by their parents- maybe we will see less kids being abused and killed or shuffled through foster care for years.

I agree. I think that regardless of what really happened the primary focus should be Anya, the daughter. Parents are charged with crimes when their children are taken into custody (neglect/abuse). That is not to say that it is always true. People are charged for crimes and they are innocent until proven guilty. But it makes sense that the state would take extra precaution especially because children in custody are their responsibility. That woman is vile but I think that video was made to help with his custody case not to further a gender discrimination issue, which is what it has now been made out to be.

I have a problem with these social workers and there demeanor, and there is the problem that I have is that there's so much editing on this video that I can't take it for face value. If you watch the video there is a total of 42 minutes missing, the video starts at 13:01 end at 14:09 the video is a total of 27.32 minutes long. That much video missing I cannot judge what really happened in the meeting so we don't know if he was belligerent's, or delusional but to me it seems like he wanted the best appearance to be shown to the world.

the recording laws very by states some require that both parties know that the are being recorded, and some states do not need both parties to be notified of being recorded.

My state only requires one party to be aware of the recording.

I am on the side of - we dont know what else he said. And he's very deceptive, and this video is extremely edited. I don't think they are wrong, and he's set it up. He knows that he's recording, so he's going to act one way, and I am sure he'd be willing to bait them. I don't really see a problem with them either. It isn't an easy job, and they have to get information, and they have to deal with people with mental health issues.